Get The Lead Out!

Environmentalists seriously want to get the lead out.....of bullets! This is as bad as the no smoking out of doors do gooders. Can lefties ever be happy if they are not controlling everything we do, say or think? This is beyond absurd. 

Hunters are up in arms over an Arizona-based conservation group latest bid to get the federal government to ban lead bullets, which the environmentalists claim contaminates the food chain.
The Center for Biological Diversity, which claims 220,000 members, has sent a petition  to the Environmental Protection Agency on behalf of nearly 100 groups in 35 states asking the agency to regulate lead right out of ammunition. It's the second time the group has attempted to get the EPA to take up the cause, and the group is currently suing the federal agency for rejecting the previous bid.

Get the lead out? Do the environmentalists actually care about the environment, or do they have an agenda to stifle any activity they don't agree with? Can you imagine the number of hurt, and wounded animals this ban would create? They don't care, they think lead, a naturally occurring metal, is going to ruin the environment, and they go crying to their best friend the EPA to get what they want. 

 

Funny how they think the light bulbs with mercury in them are superior to regular light bulbs. 

 

Funny how they are okay with wind turbines killing hundreds of thousands of birds and bats. 

 

Funny how they think that flying thousands of miles in planes to get to all those hot vacation destinations for their love ins are justified because they are green. 

 

Funny how they think scientists who are caught lying about global warming are victims.  

Funny how they think flooding vast areas of land to build a dam is okay, because that form of power is non-carbon intensive. 

Funny how they think a lead battery for eco-cars is okay, but lead bullets aren't. Where is that lead battery going to end up? 

Hunting groups scoff at the Center's claims that lead left in the carcasses of animals they shoot but don't collect harms the food chain and that spent casings can contaminate groundwater. They say the group has long sought to curb their rights to hunt and own firearms.
“They are like a woodpecker without any wood. They just keep pecking away,” Lawrence Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation told FoxNews.com. “It’s clear that their motivation is to end hunting in the United States.”

Can the greenies get any more ridiculous?

"Dirty" Energy? Yup, Wind Turbines.

What is more dirty than oil, gas, or coal? You got it, wind turbines! 

That is NOT a picture of the Alberta oil sands, that is a toxic lake created because wind turbines need rare earth metals to run. 
 

Vast fortunes are being amassed here in Inner Mongolia; the region has more than 90 per cent of the world’s legal reserves of rare earth metals, and specifically neodymium, the element needed to make the magnets in the most striking of green energy producers, wind turbines.

 

Live has uncovered the distinctly dirty truth about the process used to extract neodymium: it has an appalling environmental impact that raises serious questions over the credibility of so-called green technology.
The reality is that, as Britain flaunts its environmental credentials by speckling its coastlines and unspoiled moors and mountains with thousands of wind turbines, it is contributing to a vast man-made lake of poison in northern China. This is the deadly and sinister side of the massively profitable rare-earths industry that the ‘green’ companies profiting from the demand for wind turbines would prefer you knew nothing about.
Hidden out of sight behind smoke-shrouded factory complexes in the city of Baotou, and patrolled by platoons of security guards, lies a five-mile wide ‘tailing’ lake. It has killed farmland for miles around, made thousands of people ill and put one of China’s key waterways in jeopardy.

You never hear environmentalists talking about this, do you? I wonder why? Canada is an easy target. We are a democracy, so you can say anything you want without fear of being locked up in jail for years without a trail, or hung. Basically, environmentalists are chickens. They are also stupid. Ouch, am I being too harsh?


They want us to change to light bulbs that contain mercury, this is somehow more environmentally friendly than our regular light bulbs. They want us to convert from coal/gas/nuclear powered energy to wind turbines that are environmentally ruining our habitat. They turn their noses up at nuclear energy because it's too clean, too efficient, and creates waste, that can now be re-used. It just doesn't fit their hippy anti-corporate lifestyle. 

They want our standard of living reduced because we have it too good compared to those people in third world countries. We should be ashamed of our good fortune. Never mind that our ancestors toiled long and hard to get us to where we are today, we should feel guilty because we are not groveling in the dirt, living a life of pain and hunger. Not that they would volunteer to forgo their ipods and go to Africa to help those people. They are too busy scamming people into believing that "global warming" exists and they need to be funded to research it, to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars. We are not buying it. The science is NOT settled. Organizations like the Suzuki Foundation should not be considered charities, they are not. 


Let's go along with their world view for just a minute. The oil sands should be shut down, everyone should ride their bikes to work, and you can only eat whatever can be produced within 100 miles of where you live. Are they kidding me? Seriously? They want us to be living a substandard lifestyle, while they fly off to Bali for the latest Eco-conference. Talk about hypocrites, but they don't see it. They are so brainwashed by Gore/Suzuki and various teachers/professors that they actually believe they are crusaders for a new world. Dumb a$$es. 


How are those wind turbines working out? Try this one:

Wind farms in Pacific Northwest paid to not produce

Wind farms in the Pacific Northwest -- built with government subsidies and maintained with tax credits for every megawatt produced -- are now getting paid to shut down as the federal agency charged with managing the region's electricity grid says there's an oversupply of renewable power at certain times of the year.
The problem arose during the late spring and early summer last year. Rapid snow melt filled the Columbia River Basin. The water rushed through the 31 dams run by the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency based in Portland, Ore., allowing for peak hydropower generation. At the very same time, the wind howled, leading to maximum wind power production.

Demand could not keep up with supply, so BPA shut down the wind farms for nearly 200 hours over 38 days. 
"It's the one system in the world where in real time, moment to moment, you have to produce as much energy as is being consumed," BPA spokesman Doug Johnson said of the renewable energy.
Now, Bonneville is offering to compensate wind companies for half their lost revenue. The bill could reach up to $50 million a year.
The extra payout means energy users will eventually have to pay more. 

Nice! Put bird choppers on your land, get money, produce electricity, get money, shut down and produce nothing, get money. It's a huge WIN, WIN, WIN, for producers, a big LOSE, LOSE, LOSE, for consumers.

Environmentalists in the meantime are flying around the globe, with their fingers in their ears, shouting, WE make a difference, WE have a consensus, WE are not lying (HA), WE need more money, WE are the future, WE can occupy anywhere for no reason at all, WE know our models don't work, but who cares. 

WE are the new generation. WE have no clue what we are doing, but WE are doing it loudly, and people are paying us for it. 

YIKES!

The Sky Is Falling, The Sky Is Falling!

Obama says, NO, but maybe later. It reminded me of this:

Obama is the Keystone Cops, going over a cliff and still never getting his "man".

Poor old "heavy crude" sometimes called "bitumen", it's not as fast flowing as "light, sweet crude", so it's called "dirty". Alberta oil sands have been a huge target of foreign funded attacks by our stupid, greedy "greens".

Interesting to know, Alberta is not the only producer of "heavy crude", even though you wouldn't know it from our far left media/environmentalists.

 Increasing U.S. Dependency on Foreign Crude Oil
Over the past five years, studies of global oil production have consistently predicted that diminishing discoveries of conventional crude oil will cause worldwide oil production to peak and irreversibly decline by the end of the present decade.^{[1], [2], [3], [4], [5]} But heavy hydrocarbons still remain as a largely untapped petroleum resource — heavy crude oil and natural bitumen (also called “tar sands” or “oil sands”) exist in abundance.

Shocking! Conventional oil (1.02 trillion) is ruled by the middle east, and heavy oil (5.6 trillion) is ruled by Canada. Still Obama rejected Canadian oil in favour of middle east oil and even the Venezuela heavy oil. A well hidden fact is that California oil is 51% "heavy crude", but don't expect environmentalists to tell you about that, or to ever protest in the US.

Heavy oil was discovered in California before the turn of the previous century and currently comprises about half of the state’s crude oil production. With this production spread among more than 200 reservoirs, significant infrastructure to access heavy oil is already in place.

Foreign interests are sponsoring Canadian environmental groups to stop the Gateway pipeline. WHY? What's in it for them, except control of our oil without investment in it?

Even the middle east realizes that "heavy crude" has to be looked at.

Middle East oil countries should increase production of heavy oil as oil prices remain higher and improved technology makes it easier, those attending an industry conference in Bahrain were told.

....

Production and refining of heavy crude costs more than recovering and processing light crude. Production of heavy oil from oil sands in Canada’s Alberta province has an estimated break-even point of $35 a barrel, Mirza noted. But Bahrain’s heavy oil could be recovered at a cost of between $8 and $9 a barrel, he said.
Oil prices in recent weeks have fluctuated in a range of $70 to $80 a barrel, which OPEC officials have declared an ideal range.
“Heavy oil will be a savior to the ever-increasing demand for fossil fuels from the developing nations,” Mirza was quoted as saying.

Hello environmentalists, the gig is up. You should go to the middle east and tell them that they need the same environmental controls as Canada has had imposed on them. But they won't because environmentalists are chicken little's, running around in circles, wearing polar bear suits, yelling that the sky is falling, the sky is falling!

NO Pipelines, NO Tankers, NO Social Programs!

BC, land of the free to be hypocritical. Their greenies are protesting a pipeline to Kitimat BC because, well, just because. Okay, they are worried about oil spills from the pipeline. Do they know that a pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver has existed for over 50 years, without a spill?

As a matter of fact, even the far left Tyee, has an article that shows an increase in oil tanker traffic from Vancouver. Do the people living in Vancouver know that a oil pipeline runs under the city? One or two commentators show some common sense:

blackie

There's an appalling lack of knowledge about what that hated pipeline system actually does (and has been doing now for about 50 years), and what would happen in the Lower Mainland if it were suddenly shut down (as so many of you seem to be arguing).

1. It transports crude oil to the one remaining refinery in the Lower Mainland (there used to be four). Shut down the line, and that refinery either closes and lays everyone off, or starts importing oil in tankers (which is how it happened before they built the pipeline.)

2. It transports in batches gasoline, diesel, jet fuel etc -- all refined products -- sold in the Lower Mainland. Shut the system down, and you can put all the cars and the buses up on blocks and get your bicycles out (don't forget the snow tires). The alternative is to ship much much more of that stuff in tankers on the highways -- all the way from Edmonton. Think that's safer?

3. Yes, it ships some crude offshore in tankers, and more of it every year. No tanker spills yet. If Dogwood and First Nations opposed to the Kitimat line succeed (I think they will) then you can expect even more crude (triple, in fact) to come down the line to Vancouver. Why? Hands up all those who think it's a good idea to sell oil only to the US.

I know, you don't want Canada to sell ANY oil to ANYONE. Well, good luck with all those great social programs you like.

Funny how the opposition are yapping about no oil tankers on the west coast when they have been there for years. They also don't want a pipeline to Kitimat because the pipeline might burst or something. It's a plain case of blackmail. The environmentalists and First Nations are blackmailing the oil companies and Canadians by their lawsuits and protests. If they persist, look at what Alberta can do:

We can send it right on down to Seattle or Portland or any other destination that already has existing pipelines. Oh, my goodness, we might even be able to send that tar sands oil to eastern Canada. LOOK, we already have pipelines going to Winnipeg and Ottawa. Yikes how did that happen? Real pipelines sending real oil all across Canada and the US with no big spills. You lefties better get those pipelines shut down tomorrow because it is obviously too dangerous in high density areas. Seriously, shut them down! Stop all oil tankers from docking at the Vancouver and Halifax harbours, NOW!

In Ottawa on Tuesday, a group of environmentalists, first nations and Opposition Members of Parliament called for a West Coast ban on oil tanker traffic. Such a ban would kill the Enbridge project.

Hey lefties don't forget the East Coast too, you don't want to appear to be hypocrites do you? Oh, I forgot the Irvings OWN the east coast and they love blood oil, not Alberta's ethical oil. Talk about a monopoly that should be investigated. Suck it up sweethearts, you are blackmailing Canadian taxpayers, and we will not stand for it anymore. Stop the pipeline if you want, we will send our oil to Seattle, and they can gain the employment benefits, or Billings Montana, then we won't have to deal with BC at all.

NO pipelines, NO tankers, NO social programs!

Green Prisons! A Match Made In Heaven.

Greens want utopia, prisoners want a new start in life, blend the two together and you get green prisons! It's an idea everyone can love. Here's how it works:

You take a bunch of greenies protesting the oil sands and a bunch of criminals protesting their unfair treatment in prisons and combine the two. You set them down in the NWT with solar panels, wind turbines, and enough materials to build shelter. It's a win win situation. The greenies can build their perfect non-oil utopia while helping reform criminals, who just need more hugs.

Think about it. Environmentalists keep telling us that the end is near if we don't change our habits, but they are they biggest users of oil products out there (plane travel to Mexico anyone, massive houses for Gore and Suzuki). If they were really serious they would set up a prototype village using only renewable energy sources. This has not been done to my knowledge. They seem to be too happy in their university dorms to actually live the life they want to impose on us.

If they are to be believed then they should lead by example. Given that our world has a fever (Gore), they should set up operations in the Arctic, to show us how to grow vegetables using wind and solar power. They should also abide by the hundred mile rule to live. If we incorporate a prison into the mix, they can train the prisoners in the set up and maintenance of green energy, so they will have a skill when they return to society. Of course if the prisoners forget to take care of the bird choppers, a prison break is very likely. In the newly warmed world, the prisoners would stand a very great chance of surviving the melting Arctic.

If I must fund environmentalists with my tax dollar, I demand that they prove that non-renewable energy is possible in Canada, in the winter. Build a model village using only renewable wind and solar, fill it with criminals and make it work. Why haven't the greenies done this yet? They have been yelping for more than 20 years, but have accomplished nothing.

On Becoming a Locavore!

That's it, I'm joining the latest green campaign, I'm going to become a locavore! What the heck is a locavore you ask? It's the new environmental movement to eat produce from within 100 miles of your home.

I already grow my own produce, so I'm within the 100 yards rule! I make my own pasta sauce, pickles, salsa, pickled beets and for fruit, frozen raspberries and raspberry wine, all from my backyard! That should keep us over the winter. For protein I will have to send my husband out deer hunting, if not deer, we have plenty of rabbits in the neighbourhood, so it's all good.

Now that I have joined the locavores, I want to push all my soul mates to expand the list to include more than just produce. Why restrict the 100 mile rule to only locally grown produce? I want all goods and services bought to be produced within the 100 mile limit! That rule includes AVON products, seeing as they are trying to be so environmentally friendly.  Some of the products environmentalists will be happy to see on the list are vehicles, oil and gas, energy, lumber, steel, clothes, shoes, furniture and appliances, computers....really the list is endless.

Seeing as capitalism is so bad, this should totally destroy those capitalist pigs! We know how Walmart buys most of it's products from China, so this rule would stop them in their tracks. Only people in southern Ontario would be able to own cars, but they can't get any gas within 100 miles, so that takes millions of cars off the road. Flying over the 100 mile limit would not be allowed, so get those bikes out and start heading to the next eco-party in South Africa...make sure you have a sailboat waiting when you reach the ocean. Remember, no oil or gas unless it's produced within 100 miles of your location, you could close the "dirty" oilsands down within days.

This will reduce our carbon foot print in no time.  I think I'm on the right track....but seems to be a really bleak dismal existence, maybe I'll rethink my becoming a locavore.

Eco Slap Down, Aliens And Halloween! RADICAL!

No, this is not the Friday Night Funnies, but it should be! Stick with me now, it will all make perfect sense to someone out there! HA!

The start, the chickens are coming home to roost:

Lawrence Solomon: Global warming propagandist slapped down

William Connolley, arguably the world’s most influential global warming advocate after Al Gore, has lost his bully pulpit. Connolley did not wield his influence by the quality of his research or the force of his argument but through his administrative position at Wikipedia, the most popular reference source on the planet.

Through his position, Connolley for years kept dissenting views on global warming out of Wikipedia, allowing only those that promoted the view that global warming represented a threat to mankind. As a result, Wikipedia became a leading source of global warming propaganda, with Connolley its chief propagandist.

His career as a global warming propagandist has now been stopped, following a unanimous verdict that came down today through an arbitration proceeding conducted by Wikipedia. In the decision, a slap-down for the once-powerful Connolley by his peers, he has been barred from participating in any article, discussion or forum dealing with global warming. In addition, because he rewrote biographies of scientists and others he disagreed with, to either belittle their accomplishments or make them appear to be frauds, Wikipedia barred him — again unanimously — from editing biographies of those in the climate change field.

Then we get this, the guy is a serial repressive:

Wikipedia climate revisionism by William Connolley continues

Apparently Wikipedia’s own attempt at self policing problem editors isn’t working. Despite being up for a restriction or a ban, rogue Wiki editor (and Real Climate co-founder) William Connolley is still removing anything he doesn’t like when it comes to climate science. This time it’s wholesale removal of any reference to the American Physical Society resignation letter of physicist Hal Lewis, who resigned over the APS global warming position:

Which leads to this example of where the whole CO2 is dangerous shtick leads...into the twilight zone:

Retired NORAD Officer's New Book Predicts a Tentative Worldwide UFO Display on October 13, 2010

A newly-published book by a retired NORAD officer predicts October 13, 2010 as the tentative date for a fleet of extraterrestrial vehicles to hover for hours over the earth's principal cities. Author says the event to be the first in a series intended to avert a planetary catastrophe resulting from increasing levels of carbon-dioxide in the earth's atmosphere dangerously approaching a "critical mass."

And finally, I think this shows where greenies are heading with their CO2 is evil propaganda:

Moose Jaw Halloween fundraiser cancelled for ‘inviting evil’

It was not long after sending out the fall issue of its newsletter announcing a Halloween fundraiser that the Western Development Museum in Moose Jaw started receiving complaints; pastors came to the museum in person, emails and phone calls rolled in and concerns from church groups and community members were expressed to politicians saying the planned seance and ghost walk was “inviting evil” into the community.

Is there a full moon coming up? Environmentalism is now a religion. Or should I say that RADICAL environmentalists are to blame for climate change scare tactics, so I don't get into trouble? It seems that as long as you put RADICAL in front of whatever group you are talking about, it becomes politically acceptable these days. So, I'm not blaming ALL environmentalists for climate fraud, just the RADICAL ones! Now, you decide who are the RADICALS, and who aren't!

When environmentalists try to change the facts or restrict them, they become as bad as those fringe religions with total nutcakes as their "ministers". Halloween, aliens and environmentalists are now a perfect match, and environmentalists did it to themselves. They have lost all credibility, and their cause is a big failure. Too bad, if they would have stuck with REAL pollution of our air, land and water, we would still be with them, but they couldn't help jumping the shark!

BAN All Tankers And Ships!

Seriously, let's not discriminate here, all ships are a danger to the environment, and planes and off shore oil wells, and Liberals.

Let me get this straight. Tankers from Saudi Arabia are allowed to deliver oil to Quebec and Ontario, and it's not a problem, but tankers taking Alberta/Sask oil to China and India is a big no no? Is Iggy serious? Send Canadian money for blood oil out of the country, and DO NOT allow Canadians to sell their oil? This might get them some green and separatist votes, but will kill western Canada, the only engine supporting Ontario and Quebec.

Maybe we should lobby for a law that restricts the east from importing oil from other countries? That would be fair. If the west can't export our own oil to anyone we want, kind of like our farmers can't sell their own wheat, why should the east be able to export their wheat to anyone they want AND import oil from any country they want? Kind of unbalanced there don't you think?

Why doesn't the east buy our oil? The only way we could get them to do that was when Trudeau imposed the National Energy Program on the west so that we HAD to sell our oil to the east at 85% of the world price. It still ticks westerners off.

Iggy, maybe you should check with Mo Strong on this policy, you see, China has invested heavily in the oil sands and I'm pretty sure they expect to get their oil delivered by tanker to them. It's called the free market.

Even lefty Martin of the NP thinks it's a bad policy.

Don Martin: Fear behind Ignatieff’s oil tanker policy

While oil tankers now prowl Canada’s east and west coasts and roll up the St. Lawrence River to Montreal without the public giving it a second thought, Ignatieff’s plan would banish tankers from a safer port in northern B.C. and kill much-needed jobs and investment in the region.

Ignatieff’s vow, should he ever become prime minister, singles out for a ban one vital link — between the oil sands and China’s voracious energy thirst — that would give the oil sands a competitive alternative to an America that views the resource as dirty energy to be priced at a discount.

Environmentalists will never be happy until we are all living in caves, and it appears that's where the Liberals want westerners. Talk about divisive politics, the Liberals have that down pat.

Stop Paul Martins coal ships too then Iggy. Coal is a bigger pollution problem then oil and gas, but the Liberals are quiet about that. Shut down those coal mines, shut down the oil sands (which Iggy says he supports, but not allowing tankers would shut development down), shut down forestry, shut down the asbestos industry, keep western farmers chained to the Canadian wheat board, stop exporting potash, stop diamond mining, the list is endless.

Funny how it's the oil sands that lefties are targeting again. If the US thinks the oil sands are "dirty" and stop importing, then China and India are our next best markets, but no tankers means no oil exports. It's ridiculous. It's ill thought out. It's typical lefty policy, support the special interest groups and give no thought to Canadians and the jobs this policy would kill. Most of all, it is divisive. Shame.

Arctic.....Everybody Wants A Piece!

I must admit I hadn't heard about the Arctic Counsel until Hillary blasted Canada for not including it in today's meetings, and with the same breath asked Canada to stay in Afghanistan. The US, making enemies of their friends, at an astonishing rate!

Clinton blasts Canada for exclusive Arctic talks

Ms. Clinton's bombshell, delivered in a prepared statement as she was meeting with Mr. Cannon and senior ministers from three other Arctic coastal nations - Denmark, Norway and Russia - cast a cloud over a meeting that was intended to show solidarity among the ocean's five shoreline states and highlight their "unique" position as chief guardians of the region's environment and resource riches.

"Significant international discussions on Arctic issues should include those who have legitimate interests in the region," said Ms. Clinton, "and I hope the Arctic will always showcase our ability to work together, not create new divisions.

"We need all hands on deck because there is a huge amount to do, and not much time to do it. What happens in the Arctic will have broad consequences for the earth and its climate. The melting of sea ice, glaciers and permafrost will affect people and ecosystems around the world," she said, "and understanding how these changes fit together is a task that demands international co-operation."

Well Hillary, good to see you didn't need a teleprompter to read your prepared notes, too bad you can't think about what is good for the Arctic, and it is not the EU! They banned seal, why should they be included in Arctic discussions? Also if you would look on a map, the only true Arctic nations are Canada, US (thanks to Alaska), Russia, Norway and Denmark. Why should Finland be included? Or Iceland, they are in the Atlantic, it appears India and China want in on our resources as well.

To many in the European Union - which was recently blocked by Canada and others from gaining even "observer" status at the Arctic Council because of the continent's ban on seal products - Monday's party-of-five brainstorming session represented a troublesome narrowing of polar interests at a time when the wider world, including China and India, is angling for greater involvement in charting the future of the circumpolar realm.

HA! At least Canada stopped the EU from gaining any status on the Council! Maybe the EU should think about their position... ban seal products worth about 2 million a year, or get your grubby little muckers on some Arctic oil?

Oh, Hillary, the Northwest passage is Canada's waters, NOT international waters, that's what this is all about isn't it? Band together with other countries so you get free sailing through our waters.

If you think that is bad, go to the Arctic Counsel's site and see how many organizations and special interest groups think they should have some say in what we do with our land!

The environmentalists have their sticky little fingers all over this Council.

There are six Working Groups of the Arctic Council:

* Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP)
* Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP)
* Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF)
* Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR)
* Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME)
* Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG)

No working group on oil drilling? It's an environmentalists dream come true! No wonder only countries who actually have land in the Arctic Ocean were invited, look at just one of the lists of organizations:



Well, well, well, looky there, it's the WWF!! Who would have guessed? These are the organizations that want some say in the Arctic? PM Harper sure is right, if we don't protect it, we will lose it! Not to be left out:



That's right the UN! The snakes are all lined up in the grass, just waiting for the Arctic to melt. Too bad, it's going to get much colder before anyone is going to be cruising through the Northwest passage with anything but a nuclear sub!

Butt out of Canada's Arctic!

CO2 = Air Fertilization!! I Love That Term!

One of these things isn't like the others, can you spot which one? I can spot which one it is, too bad environmentalists can't spot the three true pollutants.

Asbestos:

Quebec urged to end asbestos exports

'Virtually all Quebec's asbestos is exported to developing countries, where protections are few and awareness of hazards are non-existent,'— Letter from international group of scientists to Premier Jean Charest

These are "real" scientists not your fake econuts. The econuts are silent on this, could it be because Quebec is a socialist province? Bloq MP's are calling for the shut down of Alberta's oilsands, but are strangely silent on their asbestos industry, which we know is dangerous to our health.

Mercury:

CFL Bulbs Have One Hitch: Toxic Mercury

The Environmental Protection Agency and some large business, including Wal-Mart, are aggressively promoting the sale of compact fluorescent light bulbs as a way to save energy and fight global warming. They want Americans to buy many millions of them over the coming years.

But the bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, a neurotoxin, and the companies and federal government haven't come up with effective ways to get Americans to recycle them.

"The problem with the bulbs is that they'll break before they get to the landfill. They'll break in containers, or they'll break in a dumpster or they'll break in the trucks. Workers may be exposed to very high levels of mercury when that happens," says John Skinner, executive director of the Solid Waste Association of North America, the trade group for the people who handle trash and recycling.

Skinner says when bulbs break near homes, they can contaminate the soil.

Mercury is a potent neurotoxin, and it's especially dangerous for children and fetuses. Most exposure to mercury comes from eating fish contaminated with mercury.

This is the same Environmental Protection Agency that has declared CO2 to be a pollutant, but mercury in light bulbs...not a problem! Neurotoxin good, CO2 bad! I remember when they used to call it mercury poisoning, but I guess that's not the case anymore, could it have anything to do with GE??? Just asking...

Lead:

List of Recalled Toys for Lead Poisoning Hazards – Childrens Toy Recalls from China

Just to give you an idea of how many children’s toys have been recalled due to lead poisoning hazards and/or violations of lead safety standards, we have compiled a list based on all of the recalls announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) so far this year.

CO2:

Carbon Dioxide (Co2) Enrichment Air Fertilization

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) contributes to plant growth as part of the miracle of nature known as photosynthesis. This enables plants to combine Carbon Dioxide and water with the aid of light energy to form sugar. Some of these sugars are converted into complex compounds that increase dry solid plant substances for continued growth to final maturity. However, when the supply of carbon dioxide is cut off, or reduced, the complex plant cell structure cannot utilize the sun's energy fully and growth or development is curtailed.

Although carbon dioxide is one of three main components which combine to produce the products necessary for plant growth, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air is only 0.03% (250 to 330 parts per million). This compares to 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 0.97% trace gases in normal air. Numerous tests have proven that during the winter months carbon dioxide concentrations inside greenhouses is invariably much lower than in outside air. This same phenomenon has been shown in controlled environment gardens.

CARBON DIOXIDE (CO2)
IMPROVES PLANT GROWTH AND QUALITY
Research has shown that in most cases rate of plant growth under otherwise identical growing conditions is directly related to carbon dioxide concentration.

The amount of carbon dioxide a plant requires to grow may vary from plant to plant, but tests show that most plants will stop growing when the CO2 level decreases below 150 ppm. Even at 220 ppm, a slow-down in plant growth is significantly noticeable.

Colorado State University conducted tests with carnations and other flowers in controlled CO2 atmospheres ranging from 200 to 550 ppm. The higher CO2 concentrations significantly increased the rate of formation of dry plant matter, total flower yield and market value.

Yikes!!!!! Plants stop growing at CO2 levels below 150ppm? Plants do better the HIGHER the CO2 concentrations??? This isn't what we have been told, someone has been lying to us, could it be the environmentalists, who love mercury, but not CO2?

What is the current CO2 level?

389.91ppm

Atmospheric CO2 for February 2010


Now, I don't like to link to scare sites, but this one is so out there that I'm sure no-one really believes their hype. According to them, we are at 389.91ppm, plants love 550ppm, so, we really need to crank up the CO2 people! Forget about earth hour, we need a CO2 week, where we run our cars, and factories at full 24 hour production to be able to feed more people. Forget carbon sequestration, we need to blast that stuff right into our greenhouses and atmosphere so we can promote food growth! Or as they call it "Air Fertilization"!

One of these things is not like the others, a kid in grade three could figure it out, why can't the climate change money grabbing lobby groups?

Money Grab Or Real Concern?

Remember back to when the ozone layer was being depleted and we were the cause? All our vehicles and refrigerators had to be upgraded and it cost us. Companies made out like pirates. It was totally unnecessary.

You know those new squiggly light bulbs that have been mandated by law? Ever heard of GE? Do you think they might make a fortune on those over priced mercury filled bulbs? Yup, me too. What amazes me is that eco-nuts aren't up in arms about mercury being deliberately introduced into our households. They are strangely silent about that, or maybe it's not so strange.

You know how Suzuki always screams about how "deniers" are all funded by "big oil"? Funny how lots of these supposedly environmental companies are funded by "big business". I guess that's okay in lefty lala land.

Climatism and the new green industrial state

One of the big green lies about global warming science and climate change policy is that the issues are vicious battlegrounds between corporate interests and environmentalists. David Suzuki has been pushing this idea for years, at times going so far as to claim that the National Post and some of its editors/writers are corporate pawns and shills for big business's anti-climate change agenda.

.....

If there's a corporate-driven global PR machine, it's firmly on the side of climate control, grinding out one corporate climate agenda after another, an avalanche of business-government co-operation the likes of which the world has never seen. And smack in the middle of this global PR machine, shifting the gears and greasing the wheels, are the world's leading environmentalists and green NGOs: The World Wildlife Fund, David Suzuki, the Sierra Club, Environmental Defence, Forest Ethics, the Pembina Institute and many more. Together with industry, they pressure government in the creation of the green industrial state.

.....

Renewable energy may well be the best demonstration yet of the folly of climatism. But there is much more to come, at Copenhagen and beyond. Last week, to pick one example, a Canadian green business summit boasted Walmart, Maple Leaf Foods, Coca-Cola Bottling, McDonald's, Home Depot as leaders, with a keynote speech by David Suzuki titled, "Business, like every other sector in society, must understand that being green is about sustainability." He'll be speaking to the converted.

Wonder why businesses like Coca-Cola and Walmart are climbing onto the green wagon? It's the green of profit they see, and the eco-nuts are right there with them, not concerned about actual reductions in CO2, but with lining their own pockets at our expense. With the green parties numbers at around 6%, I suspect that taxpayers are starting to see through the green fog.

Here is what I think is another scam, H1N1. Have you noticed the number of hand dispensers popping up everywhere? A person would be smart to invest in those companies stocks! This isn't just happening in Canada, it is worldwide. Think of the profits companies are making this year by supplying TWO flu shots. The regular flu shots are still being offered, but now we also have the H1N1 flu shot as well! Canada alone has ordered over 50 million of the shots, and we only have 33 million people. So the companies that make the needles, and the containers, and flu shot itself, have more than doubled their revenues because of the WHO saying this MIGHT be a pandemic. More people die of the regular flu every year than has happened with H1N1. Scare the people, grab the money and sit back laughing. Yet diabetics, who need the needles to live, have to pay for them.

Remember how mad cow disease was going to be deadly? Where is all the hype about AIDS? Aren't kids still dying in Africa from malaria? Problem for them is that they don't have any money, so they get to starve and die while the big corporations line their pockets with green dollars and fake pandemic bucks. SARS, global cooling, global warming, acid rain, ozone depletion, bird flu, flesh eating disease, climate change....money grab or real concerns?

Small molecule offers big hope against cancer

Funny no big companies are willing to fund this research because the cure is already a common chemical and there is no money to be made in it's production.

No Pickles This Year!

I know all the global warming nuts will not agree that this summer has been cooler than normal, but my plants tell me it has been. Cold weather is by far more harmful than warmer weather as far as crops are concerned.

Drought, cool temperatures threaten crops

While Canadians across much of the country have complained about a summer of weird weather, farmers say the rollercoaster ride of temperatures is wreaking havoc on their crops.

In the west, it's been a bad summer for B.C. forest fires, but the threat they pose to local wineries is just beginning.

.....In Alberta, meanwhile, the province has been suffering through its worst drought in 80 years. The drought has been so severe in some areas that cattle have nothing to eat.

Cattle farmer Seth Barnfield told CTV News that he's going to have to sell off his cows because the land simply can't sustain them any longer.

"We may have to do like a lot of people, and just sell them all out," he said. "That's the way you look at it. It's getting pretty tough."

In Manitoba and Ontario, soggy summer weather and cool temperatures have stunted some crops and resulted in a shortened growing season.

This is not something to just shrug off, this means fewer people will survive, because when crops fail, people suffer.

We are already feeling the end of summer. The leaves are starting to fall, and frost alerts are getting more common. Because we had such a late spring this year most crops are at least three weeks behind, and now the cooler weather is harming late crops like cucumbers. I have lots of blooms, but no cucumbers yet. My zucchini are starting to grow, then they stop, wrinkling up and dying on the vine. The cold evenings are stopping all growth.

My potatoes, carrots and beets are doing just great, but my tomatoes are smaller this year and are not even close to ripening. I know this is only one garden in Edmonton, but if you add up all the gardens/farms out there, it is worrying.

I do not believe that this years weather has anything to do with global warming/ climate change. As a matter of fact, global warming would have increased my crop, therefore feeding more people. If the oil sands are creating global warming, why isn't Alberta warmer? Why have we not had any smog alerts here in Edmonton?

The environmentalists are quick to blame the oil sands for polluting our planet, they are not so quick to tell us why China's coal industry is not polluting anything, even though you can see the pollution in the air. They want us to feel guilty because we have a much better living standard than those in third world countries, yet they fail to tell us that those third world countries are mostly controlled by dictators who repress their own people.

It's time to shake off the environmentalists, they whine and complain but do nothing. Does Suzuki have a garden? Does Lizzie May? Have they gone to Africa to dig a well? Do they do anything except protest? Seriously, what have they built? Do they have wind turbines running their power? HA!

No pickles this year because of global cooling.

Fly On The Wall? Don't You Dare Kill It!

So, President Obama kills a fly during an interview, and PETA gets all sanctimonious about killing a common house fly. Are they serious? Or are they using it as an opportunity to get some TV time? Who cares? Maybe we should stop laughing at them, and start to think about the harm they are doing.

They have joined with the lefty econuts to shape our kids future. Funny how they are concerned about one dead house fly, but millions of kids dying from malaria, not so much.

One of the most destructive results of the environmental movement has been the banning of DDT. I guess that PETA is also against the killing of mosquitoes, as is the WHO. MILLIONS of people (not animals) have died because of the ridiculous position of econuts and most governments.

Nothing prevents malaria better than DDT application

By Diane Katz

Death from malaria means convulsions and delirium, retching and diarrhea, joint and abdominal pain so excruciating that coma can be a blessing. The parasitic infection destroys the body’s red blood cells and clogs its capillaries, depriving vital organs and the brain of blood. That malaria strikes some 300 million people annually — and kills an African child every 30 seconds — is all the more tragic given how preventable it is. But modern environmental ideology simply doesn’t permit the use of DDT, the most effective means of eradicating the ghastly disease.

Read the whole thing, it's worth it. Remember Belinda Stronach and Bill Clinton raising money for useless bed nets? Honestly tell me if you were visiting Africa, would you stay in a place with bed nets or one that had sprayed with DDT?

Kill a fly, everyone gets offended, kill millions of people, cue the crickets. Or is that the true game plan with econuts? It's a good way to reduce the population.

Interesting exchange today in question period. The opposition was whining about cod fishing quotas. The Minister of Fisheries, indicated that one of the main problems was the 6 million seals that were eating all the cod. Might we see a seal cull? Won't that drive the PETA nuts crazy. Protest the killing of seals or the killing of the cod by the seals? My bet is that they will protest against the HUMANS who are killing the seals. I get the feeling that PETA hates people.

Fly on the wall? Don't just smack it, catch it and send it to PETA, see what they do with a million or more flies to dispose of, bet they kill them, like they did the animals they "rescued", like they wanted to kill Knut the polar bear.

So, this summer, collect your pesky house flies, ants, termites, and send them into PETA, let's practice what they preach!

The Dark Hour!

Well another earth hour has come and gone, all was typical on my street, except for the one NDP family sitting in the dark. Funny how they have three vehicles and a bob cat for snow removal, but think one dark hour forgives all excesses.

We are supposed to feel guilty for living a comfortable modern life. As a collector of antiques, I enjoy the old way, but do not want to return to it any time soon. From what we are hearing, our days are numbered because we are not respecting Mother Earth. Here is an example:

Toward the end of the period for these upheavals to take place, the earth will shift its poles causing the Polar caps of the Arctic and Antarctica to begin melting. When this occurs there will be major rising of the ocean levels that some estimate to be several hundred feet. A large part of coastal land masses world wide will be flooded and there will be an exodus of people to higher ground. The melting won't occur overnight, however, your beachside condo will become worthless overnight. Some of those areas that enjoy the bliss of tropical weather will find themselves living in the new Arctic polar regions, and those living in colder regions will need to buy beach chairs and sun tan oil.

One of the signs of the entry into this period, is the movement in land masses in the Pacific Ocean area, simultaneously with similar activity in the Mediterranean Sea and Mt. Etna in Sicily. This will mark the beginning of the earth changes on a grand scale.

California and the Baja Peninsula will disappear during a series of intense earthquakes. San Francisco, Los Angeles and Santa Barbara will be only a few of notable cities that will not exist afterwards. The Pacific Ocean will cover the western part of the US up to Arizona and Nebraska. Both will have ocean harbors towns.

Typical environmental chatter, right? HA! It sure sounds like it to me, but it's even more scary when you consider the source of those predictions, and it might sound like Al Gore, but it's not. This guy isn't even an environmentalist, but I think environmentalists have been reading up on him. No, he is not Nostradamus, but they are like minded, and they do not contradict each other.

The dark hour, is a good precursor to what will come. Do not assume that the eco-nuts will be happy with just one hour for long, they will demand more, and more, and more, as the unsatisfied can never be fulfilled. The dissatisfied always need a cause to rally around because they have no ability to create anything or to help themselves. They do not want to help themselves, they want the government to rescue them from themselves.

So, who was the person talking about ocean levels rising as much as 100 feet? Watch this:



Edgar Cayce, "The Sleeping Prophet", is no less an expert then Al Gore, he just has a much more successful prediction rate, his is over 95%, Al Gore's, not so much.
Now, I am not saying I believe this guy anymore than I believe Suzuki, but if we are to believe what Suzuki says, why not this guy? He was 99% accurate in his predictions, he has a whole library of his readings, and he predicted what is happening today way back in the 1940's, not today like Gore.

If we are to believe the greenies about global warming without any evidence that it is happening, why not this guy?

The dark hour is nothing more than an opportunity for the eco-nuts to feel like they have some power.

Are The Greens Really Green?

The greens talk a lot about the environment and climate change, but are they themselves green? We already know that Al Gore has his mansions paid for with carbon credits, and Suzuki has two houses on the beach (thought beaches were going to disappear because of global warming?) paid for by taxpayers because of his CBC shows and appearances, so the two head honchos in North America are not green, but how about green organizations?

I started thinking about this because of this article:

The price is fright

OTTAWA -- While the world has slumped into recession, taking the price of oil down with it, the sudden rise in the cost of food is hitting Canadians when they can least afford it.

And experts predict there will be no sudden drop in prices at the grocery store cash register like there was at the gas pumps at the beginning of the economic downturn.

A comparison of food prices tracked by Statistics Canada shows that from January 2008 to January 2009 food bought from Canadian stores rose by almost 9%. Fresh fruit went up by 16%, vegetables by 20%, breads and cereals by as much as 11% and non-alcoholic drinks by 12%.

"Food prices rose dramatically around the world last year and there is no one simple answer to it," said John Scott, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers.

Isn't this what the little green guys have been warning us about? Are we not supposed to buy our food within a 100 mile radius? Are we not expected to spend more and buy organic food? I expect the greens to be on this like wheat in Alberta, it's right up their alley, right? Well a google search turned this up:



No Pembina Institute, no Suzuki Foundation, just one guy who wants Obama to grow his own food. So, what are the greens doing?

Well, Pembina is sucking up donors money and getting in the media to ....well blast politicians. They do have clients (not revealed), who I suspect pay them money, and they talk a lot about sustainable development, but they do not DO anything. They tell us what we should DO, but greenies don't seem to be organizing any projects, just protests. Earth4Energy wants to SELL you the secrets of creating your own solar panels, saving you hundreds of dollars, nothing about growing your own food.

Could it be that there is NO money to be made in organizing community gardens? I did check out this promising site, Grow Your Own Organic Vegetables, all of their external links are to universities, oh, and they have some books to sell you too! Environmentalists, appear to be in it for the money, not the earth, not to improve our lives, but to improve their bank accounts.

We hear about wind power, as if that is a new concept.



We also hear that we shouldn't flush unless it's brown. Do they want us back to this?



Environmentalists are not forward thinking, they want us to go backwards. They do not start programs, other than those that brainwash our children, they do not actually show those children have to plant a garden, weed it and harvest it, that would be too much work. They are not over in Africa, helping the people there to grow their own food? Nope they are protesting genetically modified food, that seed that produces more, can be made drought and disease resistant, it's a seed, how can modifying it be bad? We couldn't grow wheat in Alberta if we didn't modify the seeds for our shorter growing season. Don't even mention nuclear energy to these nuts.

From the Pembina website:

Research to date concludes that no other energy source combines the generation of a range of conventional pollutants and waste streams — including heavy metals, smog and acid rain precursors, and greenhouse gases — with the generation of extremely large volumes of radioactive wastes, that will require care and management over hundreds of thousands of years. The combination of these environmental challenges, along with security, accident and weapons proliferation risks that are simply not shared by any other energy source, place nuclear energy in a unique category relative to all other energy supply options.

So is Pembina outright lying about the EXTREMELY LARGE volumes? It appears so:

Almost all activities, from making dinner to driving cars,
produce “waste”, i.e. undesirable material left over. The
use of nuclear energy is no different, except that the
amount of waste is small and, while potentially hazardous,
it is very well managed........

In contrast, toxic heavy metals such as mercury and
arsenic, which are emitted from coal-fired plants and
various industrial processes, last forever.

So, you know those energy efficient squiggly light bulbs that contain MERCURY, ask your favorite environmentalist about that environmentally friendly "waste" product!! While you are at it, ask them to explain how CO2 is so bad if plants need it to grow, and ask them how to plant a vegetable garden. I predict you will get blank stares and you will be told that "the science is settled".

Personally, I like CO2, it keeps my plants happy and my house gets fresh oxygen, even in winter. Oh, and if you greenies need to learn how to grow vegetables, come on over to my house this spring, I'm planning an edible front yard!!

Obama and Harper - Climate Changers!

The environmentalists have been harping at politicians that climate change is real, and something has to be done about it, immediately. We are now seeing politicians reacting, but not to the liking of climate changers. Today is a great example of how politicians are starting to change the tune on the environmentalists.

Both President Obama and PM Harper talked cap and trade, NOT carbon tax. This must be giving Gore and Suzuki fits. You see, with cap and trade, the billions are going to the companies and actual researchers, not to the environmentalists. Gore and Suzuki talk a big game, but do nothing to actually reduce the problem. Gore's carbon credit company is going to suffer. HA!

Carbon sequestration is just as ineffectual as a carbon trading market, so billions will go towards a technology that will work only to make people feel better about using coal or heaven forbid, Alberta's "dirty oil". The MacKenzie pipeline might finally get built, again cutting environmentalists out of the money.

This clip is a huge smack in the face to environmentalists, and they just have to take it. Good job Premier Stelmach!

We have environmentalists against the cleanest form of power generation, nuclear power, and now they are against eco-fuels, carbon sequestration and are left with carbon taxes, bird killing wind turbines and solar. They have boxed themselves into a corner where they can not protest governments actually doing research and innovation on ALL fronts, not just the ones they like, they have after all told us that we are in a crisis with climate. Funny how they never mention real pollution.

Environmentalists have been out foxed, because they are good at protesting and suing, but have not contributed one good invention to cure the world. If the environmentalists protest carbon sequestration that Obama clearly supports, how can they justify it without looking like idiots? Now governments can point to the mega billion dollars being spent and say, "see we are doing something", too bad that is money that could have been better spent on health care.

Hint to the MSM, Obama calls them oil sands NOT tar sands, get with the program!

They Were For It, Before They Were Against It.

Funny how the environmentalists were the ones pushing biofuels for years. Now? Not so much. For example, the Sierra Club, back in 2007, had this to say:

The Sierra Club also strongly supports investments in biodiesel created from recurring oil-seed crops such as canola, which can be grown in Oregon as part of regular crop rotation cycles without intensive water use. However, we urge caution in promoting corn-based ethanol in Oregon. The production of ethanol from corn can create its own pollution, including carbon monoxide, methanol, toluene, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds.

That was only a year ago. In 2006, Berkeley had this to say about biofuels:

Ethanol more energy-efficient than oil, finds study
Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com
January 26, 2006

Using ethanol -- alcohol produced from corn or other plants -- instead of gasoline is more energy-efficient than oil say researchers at the University of California, Berkeley

So, they pushed and they pushed and then when they finally get what they were screaming for, what happens?

Biofuels Deemed a Greenhouse Threat
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Published: February 8, 2008
The full emissions costs of producing biofuels are higher than those of producing of conventional fuels, scientists said.

HA! What weenies, seriously, they shout, they bleat, they shove their beliefs down our throats, they protest in polar bear suits,and then, OOPS....they don't even admit they were wrong. And who do they blame? Not themselves, no, guess who...

Earth Day Resolution: No Biofuel from Food Crops

Once again, President Bush has come down on the wrong side of an environmental issue: his misguided subsidizing of American ethanol production has helped drive up grain prices. Biofuel is a disaster-in-the-works when it comes to feeding the planet. If produced on a large scale from food crops, biofuel will keep transportation costs down for the rich, while many of the planet's poor starve.

Hello, you environmentalists have been pushing for quicker renewable solutions for at least 20 years, now that you are winning, you back off, and blame the government? This is a perfect example of how first of all, environmentalists don't think any issue through, and second, that no matter what governments try to do, it will NEVER, ever be enough, not ever, until we are sitting in caves, with no wood to burn.

Nuclear, a very effiecient energy solution,nope, it's got to be solar and wind. They will only be happy when we shut down all coal operations, and of course the oil industry.

Campaign against Climate Change
Now that name is just too funny! You econuts go ahead and "campaign against climate change", all you want, but take it up with Mother Earth would you? Good luck with your 'No New Coal' March

Climate Change Protesters Hijack Coal Train

As the driver of the EWS train radioed for advice, a second group of protesters used shovels which they had also brought with them to start emptying the gravel-like power station coal on to the track.

Nice, very eco-friendly!

And as far as the G8 goes, don't these little protesters just make you want to donate to their cause?

A group of German punk rockers lying down on the lawn at the campsite remembers that last year's protests were very different.

Militant activists threw Molotov cocktails and stones during demonstrations at the summit in Germany that drew tens of thousands of protesters from around the world.

"Demonstrations here are smaller than the German protests we saw last year," said Posti, the drummer of punk band Sprengsatz who goes by one name.

Do you see why I feel justified in calling them econuts?? It's because they do more harm than good for their own cause. Let's get back to talking about cleaning up our lakes and smog, shall we? Like adults.

First They Wanted To Kill Knut....

Now the Toronto Zoo has killed two male reindeer babies. Why? Beats me. I see absolutely no logic in their actions.

Toronto Zoo brass say ... Rudolph must die!

Wait until Santa finds out. Toronto Zoo starts killing male baby reindeer to manage the herd. Staff are heartbroken -- and furious

Dear Santa: I hope you are sitting down.

The Toronto Zoo is killing baby boy reindeer.

Now Dasher! Now Dancer! Now Prancer...

The first was dispatched shortly after his birth April 8.

His mom, Hayzel, bellowed mournfully for two days. You could hear her from Meadowvale Rd.

The second met the same fate at the point of a hypodermic on April 22.

His mom, CUPE, is named for the zoo staff's union.

Both little gaffers were chocolate brown and gangly cute. They had barely begun to nurse.

Both were perfectly healthy.

"Euthanized due to being male," says the keepers' report, terse and angry.

The keepers were so upset they left as the vets moved into the reindeer enclosure and refused to take part.

"This is wrong," the keepers told the vets, who were none too happy either.

Three female babies have been spared.

Where is Greenpeace on this horror? Too busy protesting 500 ducks that died. Yesterday the sky was black with geese returning up north, ducks aren't exactly a scarce commodity. It's sad the ducks died, but it wasn't deliberate like the killing of those two reindeer. That was a deliberate choice made by the Zoo.

Funny, I thought zoos love baby animals.

There's always a fuss when a cute little snow leopard or polar bear comes into the world, out in the wilds of northeast Scarborough.

Two days before Hayzel's son was put to death with sodium pentobarbital, a press release announced the arrival of a baby gaur.

Congratulations to Flower and Hercules. Gaurs are huge, wild Asian cattle.

The baby? A bouncing boy. Doing fine.

Need I add, a week from now is Mother's Day at the zoo. Given what's transpired, I hope they have the sense not to showcase the reindeer moms. Two of them aren't celebrating.

This is okay because the Zoo can't profit from selling the males?

Maria Franke, curator of mammals, tells me the decision to euthanize male reindeer calves was made by something called the Animal Care, Research and Acquisition Committee.

"It was a gruelling process," she assures me. "We do not take this lightly. There is science behind it."

It's especially hard to sell reindeer because of disease fears. There's no room.

Too expensive to release in the wild. If they keep the males they'll be lonely. They yearn for their own harem. We can't even sell the two bucks we have now. No one likes this. It's a necessary evil. Blah, blah, blah.

Science behind it? Oh, like the science behind global warming? Environmentalists, first it's global warming, then climate change, then don't kill the baby seals, then protest duck deaths, but no problem killing two perfectly healthy male reindeer, that's science.

On Mother's Day, I hope to see huge protests against the Toronto Zoo by Greenpeace, if not, it really tells you that they are in it for the money, not to protect the environment and ALL of those who live in it.

Environmentalists Or Starving Children?

The damage environmentalists can do with their lack of understanding of supply and demand, is tremendous. I don't see them protesting this little problem.

Cost of food forces World Vision to cut aid

World Vision is cutting back on the vital flow of aid it provides to some of the world's most impoverished -- saying it can no longer afford to feed 1.5 million of the 7.5 million people that received aid last year.

World Vision cites rising food costs driven by high fuel prices, unpredictable weather and demand from China and India, as well as the failure of countries to meet their donation commitments as the driving factors for the decision.

Environmentalists are asking for a carbon tax, this will increase the price of fuel even more, which will not reduce consumption in the developed world, but it sure will impact the third world countries. Yet they still think biofuels are a good idea!

Maybe they should stop those earth days, and start helping real people, in real need. All funds that presently are being spent on carbon credits, carbon capture, and global warming scientists, should be diverted to helping with this food crisis that they helped create. Wonder how much the Suzuki Foundation is giving to World Vision?

Do they think about the damage biofuels would do, or did it just seem like a 60's kind of thing to support? Farmers are going to switch to planting corn, this will raise the price of feed for cattle farmers, who will send more cattle to be slaughtered, which will decrease the price of beef initially, but as cattle become scarcer, the price of beef will rise, and all food items are going to get more expensive.

But, hey, bring on the biofuels, and the carbon taxes, let the children starve, that will reduce everyone's footprint now won't it! If you have time to protest, you have time to go volunteer to help those who are starving.

Where should the money go? To environmentalists and global warming, or to helping starving children? To a fake crisis or to a real crisis, that is actually killing people right NOW?

Federal Court Goes "Green"

Great it's bad enough that we have to put up with envionuts like Suzuki, but now the courts are getting into the battle! Green activist Judges, now that's scary!

Federal court orders review of oilsands project

EDMONTON -- The panel that gave the green light to a massive Imperial Oil oilsands project must explain how intensity-based targets will control greenhouse-gas emissions, a federal court judge has ordered.

....A coalition of environmental groups challenged the project in federal court in Edmonton earlier this year, saying the environmental assessment was inadequate on several fronts, including regarding greenhouse-gas emissions.

Justice Daniele Tremblay-Lamer said the panel must explain how it concluded that intensity-based targets will reduce the potentially damaging effects of the project's greenhouse-gas emissions to a level of insignificance.

Maybe the Judge should make the environment groups PROVE how CO2 is harmful first! Where are their facts that prove that intensity-based targets won't work? What gives a judge the right to even hear a case like this one? If the province of Alberta owns the resources, and supports intensity-based targets, who is this judge to tell Albertans what we can or can't do to develop our resources. Notice it's a FEDERAL judge poking her nose into Alberta jurisdiction. NEPII coming at you through the federal courts.

If you can't close down projects, and the oilsands through protests, try the courts? Nice, now I've got to go select the tree I'm going to be living in.